Birth Rights, To Be or Not To Be?

The Democrat tergiversation of their once rock-solid position on illegal immigration and how to
protect our country from it is so shameful that it shocks the very foundations of our long and
respected adherence to republican constitutionalism. The shame! The Left isn’t shamed!

Good ol’ Harry Reid, the hypocrite, when he was Senate Majority Leader, once spoke out
eloquently on the subject saying that America had a duty to protect its borders and should do so
by changing the law to forbid the idea of anchor babies as legitimate American citizens as the
14th amendment was then, and still is, interpreted. “If you grant citizenship to children of parents
who have no lawful right to be in the United States, you’ll get more would-be parents attempting
to enter the United States unlawfully.” Thousands are approaching our border right now.

Harry even wrote a law for consideration. Reid’s 1993 proposal was intended to try to change
the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment by an Act of Congress, i.e.: a law. The basis of
Reid’s proposal was to: “declare that any person born after the date of enactment of this title to
a mother who is neither a citizen of the United States nor admitted to the United States as a
lawful permanent resident, and which person is a national or citizen of another country of which
either of his or her natural parents is a national or citizen or is entitled upon application to
become a national or citizen of such country, shall be considered as born subject to the
jurisdiction of that foreign country and not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States within
the meaning of section 1 of such Article and shall therefore not be a citizen of the United States
or of any State solely by reason of physical presence within the United States at the moment of
birth.” Well, obviously that didn’t catch hold but, if it had it would have then presented another
problem for the flip-flopping Democrats, how to get rid of it.

Senator, Barak Obama, once defended actions that would deny America birthrights to children
of illegal gate crashers. Then he signed DACA. How do you spell hypocrisy? Democrat?

Trump tossed out a signal that he would cease the practice of legalizing anchor babies born in
America to illegal mothers by executive order and, predictably, the left and its media went nuts
again. Trump is trolling them and they rise to his bait. There is an old saying that cautions:
“Never argue with an idiot because he’ll drag you down to his level and beat you to death with
his experience.” That might as well be said for Donald Trump. Don’t try to argue with him or
match him in the field of hardball argument. You’ll lose and look stupid doing it.

One of the arguments now rising asks how Trump’s Supreme Court would handle this issue if
the Congress actually passed a law forbidding the legitimation of birthright babies as US
citizens. It is suggested they would take their good time in serious debate and consideration and
probably find the law unconstitutional. In fact, an 1800’s era Supreme Court actually did so. But,
as constitutionalists, we know that can change because we also know that Roe vs. Wade is
unconstitutional and will, hopefully someday soon, find itself on the ash heap of liberal mistakes.
I mean, murder is murder, isn’t it? How does a potential real US citizen have the opportunity to
experience the constitutional guarantees of Life, Liberty and pursuit of happiness if they are
shredded in the womb before they even have the chance to find out? Just asking!

The Supreme Court cannot change the Constitution, only the laws that do not fit within its
construct. But, neither can they legislate. That’s not their job. This issue highlights the problem
of judicial activism that is the real danger to America. Maybe we can kill two birds with one
stone! Remember, freedom is the goal, the constitution is the way. No, go vote! (31Oct18)